Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de

l’apprentissage et de la technologie, V33(3) Fall / automne, 2007

Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology

Volume 33(3) Fall / automne 2007

Video-based multimedia designs: A research study testing

learning effectiveness

David Reiss

Author

David Reiss is an Assistant Professor of Video Production/Design at Towson UniversityElectronic Media and Film Department. Correspondence regarding this article can be sent to:dr@davidreiss.com

Abstract

Abstract: This paper summarizes research conducted on three

computer-based video models’ effectiveness for learning

based on memory and comprehension. In this quantitative

study, a two-minute video presentation was created and

played back in three different types of media players, for a

sample of eighty-seven college freshman. The three players

evaluated include a standard QuickTime video/audio player, a

QuickTime player with embedded triggers that launched

HTML-based study guide pages, and a Macromedia

Flash-based video/audio player with a text field, with user

activated links to the study guides as well as other interactive

on-line resources. An assumption guiding this study was that

the enhanced designs presenting different types of related

information would reinforce the material and produce better

comprehension and retention. However, findings indicate that

the standard video player was the most effective overall,

which suggests that media designs able to control the focus

of a learner’s attention to one specific stream of information, a

single-stream focused approach, may be the most effective

way to present media-based content.

Résumé: Cet article résume une étude vérifiant l’efficacité de

l’apprentissage basé sur la mémorisation et la

compréhension, conduite à partir de trois modèles basés sur

la vidéo informatisée. Dans cette étude quantitative, une vidéo

de deux minutes a été créée et lue sur trois types de lecteurs

différents, pour un échantillon de 87 étudiants universitaires

de première année. Les trois lecteurs évalués comprenaient

un lecteur standard audio/vidéo Quicktime, un lecteur

Quicktime avec déclencheurs intégrés qui lançait un guide

d’étude en HTML, et un lecteur audio/vidéo Flash Macromedia

avec un champ texte, comprenant des liens activés par

l’usager vers des guides d’étude et d’autres ressources

interactives en ligne. Une supposition guidant cette étude était

que les designs enrichis présentant différents types

d’informations interreliées renforceraient le matériel et

produiraient une meilleure compréhension et une meilleure

rétention. Cependant, les résultats indiquent que le lecteur

vidéo standard était le plus efficace, ce qui suggère que les

designs de médias concentrant l’attention de l’apprenant sur

une source d’information spécifique seraient la meilleure

façon de présenter du contenu médiatisé.

Introduction

As different forms of media converge via newly developed

technologies, the development and use of multimedia designs

that incorporate video playback as a major component have

been adopted by educational multimedia creators. There is a

significant body of video-based research that suggests that

cognitive processing, both conscious and unconscious, is

largely bypassed during the act of screening video (largely

based on studies of television viewing). According to visual

theorist Fred Barry and others, video and audio playback tap

into the emotional part of the brain, and viewers become

emotionally, but not logically, involved with the medium

(Barry, 1997; Halloran, 1970) . Emotional versus logical

involvement may occur because as viewers watch television,

their brains move into a hypnotic alpha rhythm stage, much

like daydreaming, even after watching television for as little as

thirty seconds (Barry, 1997) . As viewers become relaxed, the

left side of their brain, which tends to process information and

is more analytical, becomes inactive, allowing the right side of

their brain to process information both uncritically and

emotionally (Dixon, 1981) . In such a state, viewers are

susceptible to emotional manipulation just when they are

forming ideas and attitudes about the viewed material and

content (Barry, 1997) . Krugman (1970) argues that while the

brain’s response to print is characterized by fast brain waves

and mental activity, the brain’s response to television can be

described as passive and is largely made up of slow brain

waves. What can be concluded from this information is that

viewers tend to become emotionally involved with television

and that images stream into the psyche bypassing the logical

part of the brain (Krugman, 1970) .

Much of the existing research on multimedia learning—which

may include the use of text, spoken word, video, audio,

animation, and graphics—appears to be performed only on a

few specific types of media designs, such as the combination

of the spoken word and animation. The author anticipated

some interesting and insightful results from a comparative

study of three different multimedia designs that shared the

same content, focused on video playback, and included the

latest innovations for video streaming such as embedded

triggers in streaming video.

Theoretical Perspective

The theoretical perspective for this study is found in Mayer’s

(2001) well-established cognitive theory of multimedia

learning. Mayer’s work is based on a learner-centered

approach, which begins with an understanding of how human

cognition works and focuses on the use of multimedia to

enhance human learning. Some of the key findings and

techniques leading to effective practice and models that relate

to the present study include:

• Spoken narration combined with an onscreen visual guide

that does not split the attention of the learner, but in fact can

enhance the experience in certain instances.

• Sudden onset of pictures and animation is more effective for

learning than static pictures alone, presumably by directing

the learner’s attention and focus to specific elements in the

visual display.

• The sudden onset of having visual elements appear

produces the same learning enhancements as an animated

presentation. Thus, the procedure of flashing appropriate

parts of the pictorial information as they are described in the

spoken narrative is as effective as a full animation. (Craig,

Gholson, & Driscoll, 2002)

Researchers have focused on how various design features

relate to human information processing, such as comparing

and testing designs that place a light load versus a heavy load

on a learner’s visual processing channel. Allan Pavio (1986), f

or example, developed a human cognitive theory termed “dual

coding”, in which he makes a case that the human brain is

divided into two cognitive subsystems, one for processing

nonverbal objects and information, and one for processing

language. The research done by both Mayer and Pavio provide

a theoretical base for the design of the present study in which

the same video content is presented using three different

models and tested for learning effectiveness.

Purpose of Study

Video and other media forms in multimedia environments can

be effective for learning, especially in designs aimed at a

constructivist notion of effective learning. Research has been

done using specific designs and components and comparing

multimedia to traditional learning approaches. More studies

that test specific variables and components of similar designs

that are conceived based on the same video/audio playback

component, but presented in different forms to teach the same

subject matter, are needed. The present study was designed

to help address this specific knowledge gap.

This type of research is important as different forms of

computer media, like streaming QuickTime video, now offers

designers the ability to quickly create multimedia

environments within these specific formats (by embedding

triggers in the video stream itself). This technology enables

the content creator, such as a video editor, to create a

multimedia playback environment, which is a fundamental

shift. Typically the process of post production where content

is created through video and audio editing has been limited to

a single screen, but these creators can now include other

media components such as pop-up windows in their work.

While designing the multimedia models for this study, the

author ensured that one model would utilize steaming

QuickTime video with embedded triggers that launched

pop-up study guide windows during the presentation.

A key goal in this study was to determine if increased

interactivity is more effective for learning (based on measures

of comprehension and retention) when compared to similar

models with less interactivity. Based on previous research

and media design theories, specific study questions emerged,

such as: (1) Is a video that bypasses the analytical part of the

brain, but connects to the emotional part, a better or worse

teaching tool?; (2) How much interactivity combined with that

same video is too much?; and, (3) How do different types of

media designs and components compare within the

framework of teaching a single subject?

The present study is based on the testing of specific variables

and components of different designs that attempt to teach the

same subject matter, which in this case is the non-traditional

content of “Dreams and Dream Interpretation.” Each model

shares the same video and audio clip, but uses different

presentation forms. It is hypothesized that testing three

different multimedia designs all based on the same content,

and specifically sharing the same video component, should

help to identify which specific media components enhance, or

detract from, the learning processes as measured by tests of

comprehension and retention of specific content.

Research Questions and Hypothesis

The central research questions for this study are: “How well

do each of the three multimedia designs perform as learning

tools?”, and “How do these three different designs compare

to each other when presenting the same content?” The goal is

to study the effectiveness of specific types of multimedia

elements and designs by testing subjects for both retention

and comprehension from the presentation. The researcher’s

first hypothesis is that the video model with a single screen of

video playback (Model B) would emerge as the most effective

overall. The researcher’s second hypothesis is that Model B,

that combined single screen video playback with the

embedded triggers in an enhanced version, would provide a

significant increase in retention and comprehension. This

second hypothesis is based on the assumption that the

learner’s connection with a traditional video segment is

largely emotional / affective, and would improve when

combined with the carefully placed pop-up study guides that

reinforce the material being presented.

Research Design

The research project used quantitative methods to evaluate

the three different multimedia models in a series of controlled

study sessions in a computer lab environment. In each

session, only one of the three models was presented to a

group of university undergraduate communication students.

These participants all shared similar academic achievement

scores, a high level of computer literacy, and a declared major

in communications, as well as belonging to the same

early-twenties age group. The controlled environment

included headphones for each student so as not to be

distracted by other participants, and teaching assistants who

guided each participant to their workstation and closely

monitored the lab (Figure 1).

Each model’s design and effectiveness was tested and

measured by a single common method based on a written

test, measuring each learner’s retention and understanding of

the material presented during a session of one of the three

models. This test was evaluated and refined during the

pre-study, and the final version had ten questions that

measured retention, and four of the questions also measured

comprehension of basic concepts presented in the material.

Each participant’s model was pre-selected based on the

study’s need to create sample groups of the same size for

each model.

Figure 1. Study session in computer lab

Model A. Traditional Linear Video

A 2-minute segment of video and audio was played back via a

QuickTime movie window on the computer screen. The

segment was an edited version of an interview with an expert

on the subject of dreams and dream interpretation. It included

an on-camera interview, audio by the interviewee, and a series

of related graphic slides that broke up the segment and

reinforced the concepts discussed. The viewers had the ability

to control playback functions via the standard QuickTime

player controls, such as start, pause, rewind, and play similar

to a VCR (Figure 2).

The multimedia learning issue raised by Model A is how

effective traditional linear video is for learning and

comprehension when compared to more enhanced media

forms (Models B and C). As previously stated, it is widely

believed that through the act of experiencing a video playback

similar to a television, the cognitive processing that takes

place can be very powerful, since it tends to be more of an

emotional experience rather than an analytical one. Television

has a perceived credibility that helps the viewer to believe in

the content being viewed.

Figure 2. Traditional Linear Video Stream Model A: The

QuickTime movie was played back in the viewer on the

desktop sized to 320 X 240 pixels. The video screen could

enlarge to twice its normal size before suffering from pixilated

video.

Model B. Directed Linear Video

Model B used the same video segment as the first model; a

QuickTime movie was played back in the same format and

used the same player. However, Model B included the major

enhancement of embedded triggers in the video stream. These

carefully placed triggers opened two separate static study

guide windows at specifically timed points during the video

stream, and included Java script coded window consoles for

the location of the pop up windows on the screen. These

windows were carefully designed enhancements that

incorporated text and graphics relating to the content in the

video (Figure 3).

The multimedia learning issue raised by this model is whether

the enhancement of triggered timed events in a traditional

video playback environment is more effective overall (first

hypothesis). Since the viewer was forced to use both the

analytical and emotional parts of the brain, do the triggered

study guides increase learning and retention by enhancing the

powerful emotional experience of viewing video? The second

hypothesis is that the specific combination in Model B would

provide for increased retention and comprehension (over the

other two models).

Figure 3.

Directed Linear Video Model B: The QuickTime movie was

played back in the browser window. This screen shows the

two triggered browser content pages to the right .

Model C. Non-Linear User-Controlled Video

Model C used the same video and audio segment as its

content, but was played back in a custom viewer created with

Macromedia’s Flash MX software. The actual video playback

window is similar to the QuickTime players used in Models 1

and 2, but added a text field under the video screen that ran in

sync with the video (similar to closed-captioning on a

television set). Links placed on the side of the video player

allowed viewers to access the same study guide windows as

in the second model, as well as related web pages that

included interactive dream dictionaries (Figure 4).

The multimedia learning issue raised by this more

user-controlled model was whether or not the textual

enhancements impact learning and retention. Many theorists,

including Mayer (2001) and Craig et al. (2002), believe that

when content is presented in a range of media forms, and

when the users can control their experiences, a deeper level

of learning can occur. In contrast, the author anticipated that

this model would be the least effective, and believed that the

user experience would become unfocused based on two

factors. First, the viewers would not connect emotionally to

the content, and second, their focus and attention would be

fragmented by the video, audio, and text all being presented

simultaneously.

Figure 4. Non-Linear User-Controlled Video Model C: This

screen shows several of the additional browser windows

open. The user had the ability to open and place the linked

browser windows in any configuration they chose .

Participants

The study was performed at a competitive private university in

the mid-Atlantic region of the United States. The pool of

participants was made up of freshmen and sophomore

students currently enrolled as Communications majors at the

university. This group shared similar levels of education and

scholastic aptitude test scores from 1180 to 1350. Each model

was tested with a sample group of 20 to 25 students, randomly

selected from a total pool of 87 students, in order to further

ensure comparability. The controlled environment included

headphones preset at stations for each student to use for

audio playback (see Figure 1). Each participant tested one

model only, either A, B or C, and once a participant had

completed his or her respective model, he or she was not

allowed to test another model.

Data Collection

Participants filled out a brief survey before they were tested

about their respective model. This information allowed the

collection of relevant data on each subject, and included

questions regarding each participant’s computer experience,

learning style, television viewing habits, and other related

issues regarding the study. This survey data was used to

refine the analysis of the study findings presented in another

study, which compared different categories such as gender,

computer experience, self-proclaimed learning styles, and

television viewing habits. The final survey question asked if

the participant had any previous experience with the content

being presented. If this final question was answered yes, the

data from that individual was excluded from the study (see

Appendix A for complete survey).

Once the participants were properly set up at their respective

viewing stations, they viewed their pre-selected model. They

then took the written test during which they could not gain

access to any of the information from the presentation. The

test was the primary data-gathering tool for the model’s

effectiveness (see Appendix B for written test).

In November 2004 a series of test sessions were conducted to

work out various logistics of running the study, evaluate and

refine the written test as well as data collection practices, and

create a standard set of procedures and guidelines. Then in

February 2005, six separate study sessions were facilitated,

gathering data from a total of 87 participants spread evenly

over the three models. From the data collected, a database

was created that included each participant’s survey

information, and their accompanying test scores. From that

database, a series of 17 spreadsheets of the participants’

self-proclaimed learning style categories, coupled with the

test scores calculated by percentage of correct answers with a

margin of error .05%, was created. It is from that data and

spreadsheet series that the following study findings and

charts have been created. The few participants that had

technical problems, or did not fit into the study demographic

sample, were not included in the study findings.

Findings

Model A represents the Linear Video Model, based on the

video and audio playback of the 2-minute segment on dreams.

Model B is the Directed Linear Model, with the same dreams

video and audio segment played back on the computer, but

also includes a series of embedded triggers in the video

stream that open study guide pages at specific times during

the playback. Model C is the Non-Linear User Controlled Video

Model, where the video and audio is played back in a model

that includes a text field, and a series of links are provided to

various interactive websites and study guides. The (n =87)

refers to the total number of participants whose data was

collected in the study.

Figure 5 shows the overall scores for each computer-based

video model, with Q1 through Q10 denoting the ten questions

used to determine each model’s effectiveness. In seven of the

ten study questions, Model A either tied or surpassed the

scores of the other two models overall. The exceptions to this

trend were Model B in question 5, with a slight lead over the

other models, and Model B in question 9 with a significant

lead over the other models. It is also interesting to note at this

point, the interactive multimedia Model C lagged behind in

eight out of the ten questions.

Figure 5. Models A, B and C overall scores

After reviewing the study’s overall data, the findings indicate

that author’s hypothesis #1, which stated model A would be

more effective than model C, was indeed supported by the

study’s findings (t-statistic = 2.498, p-val = 0.0154) . But the

author’s hypothesis #2, which stated that the additional

pop-up study guides would increase the effectiveness of

Model B, was not supported by the study findings (t-statistic =

0.0872, p-val = 0.9308) .

It becomes clear in this study that the model solely based on

traditional video playback, Model A, appears to be at least as

effective as Model B and more effective than C. So in the end

the simple act of experiencing content presented on a single

screen provided the best results for retention and

comprehension, while the other components added to that

single screen model lessens the effectiveness with few

exceptions. Important to note here is that retention is more

widely measured from the written test, while questions

measuring comprehension was limited. The more

sophisticated Models B and C, in almost every case, are seen

to be not only less effective, but also appear to be linked with

decreased retention and comprehension, apparently by

overloading or distracting the viewer.

An analysis of the data across several demographic

dimensions did not yield statistically significant differences

(p=0.05). The data were separated according to gender and

self-reported preferred learning styles, with no significant

differences were found [3].

Overall, the lack of improvement in both Models B and C could

be linked to Pavio’s dual coding cognitive theory, where the

additional features of these models apparently overloaded one

of the two types of brain processing, in this case the ability to

process language, as most of the extra information provided

is text-based (Pavio, 1986) . Similar results have occurred in

other studies, as researchers at the Educational Technology

Expertise Centre at the Open University of the Netherlands

conducted a multimedia instructional study and found

replacing visual text with spoken text resulted in lower

retention scores (Tabbers, Martens & Merrienboer, 2004).

At the same time, this initial data seems to conflict with parts

of Mayer’s research, specifically with his findings that the

sudden “onset” of pictures and animation (such as “pop-up”

windows) prove to be more effective for learning and

produces the same learning enhancements as an animated

presentation.

Figure 6. Models A, B and C overall scores compared

Looking further at how each model scored overall, it is

apparent in Figure 6 that Model A scores higher for questions

1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and 10. Model B comes in as the second most

effective with higher scores for question 5 and 9. All three

models tie on questions 4 and 6. This data implies that Model

A may be the most effective overall, with Models B and C both

coming in a close second, producing similar results for all but

question 9.

It is interesting to note that all three models follow a similar

pattern until question 9, when both Models A and C decrease

in scores, while Model B scores rise significantly. Question 9

is based on the retention of certain objects presented in the

video. In this instance Model B’s triggered study guides that

appeared in sync with the video playback indicate a dramatic

increase in retaining content from memory. Since this study

guide uses text combined with images, perhaps the

non-verbal cognitive processing channel, as discussed in

Pavio’s dual coding theory, helps the learner to retain this

information.

These initial findings lead to more questions than definitive

answers. Why does the simple video Model A appear to be

successful overall? One reason might be that given the

content and amount of information presented, Model A’s

simple linear design is more directly related to the ten

assessment questions, while the enhanced designs of Models

B and C, which present additional forms of information, fail to

increase the retention and comprehension of the shared

content presented in the video, resulting in lower scores

overall.

The makeup of the study’s sample population should be taken

into consideration, as the demographic makeup of the

participants may skew the data in different ways. The majority

of the study subjects were women at 61%, versus the men at

39%. This leads the author to question whether more male

subjects in the study might affect the results for each model.

Age may also have been a factor in these results. It would be

interesting to run the same study and designs with younger

participants. Perhaps younger students are more adept at

multitasking on a computer with several windows and

applications open at once, and hence the more complicated

models might prove to be more effective with this group. Or

perhaps younger students are not so adept at multitasking,

but actually are “skimming”—letting their attention and focus

bounce from multiple tasks. Further research may yield some

answers about age-related use patterns.

Another factor that may have impacted this study’s findings is

the environment in which the sessions took place. The open

lab with two rows of workstations may have a negative impact

on any of these models. Does a lab environment create a

certain level of distraction, or, possibly, discomfort? A future

study might probe what would happen if the participants

tested their respective model on their home computer.

Conclusion

For most of the questions based on memory and/or

comprehension of this specific content, this study found that

a standard video segment in a single screen, with spoken

word, audio and graphics slides (Model A) appears to be the

most effective overall, which supports hypothesis #1

predicting that the video model with a single screen of video

playback would be most effective overall. While the results of

Model B produced a significant boost in retention and

comprehension in one of the ten questions, it still was not

effective enough to support or disprove the author’s

hypothesis #2, which theorized that the embedded triggers in

the enhanced model would provide a significant boost in

retention and comprehension. Model B’s results were

surprising and differ from the conclusions of previous

research of both Mayer (2001) and Pavio (1986)

This study’s findings suggest that a media design that is able

to control the focus of a learner’s attention to one specific

stream of information, a single-stream focused approach, may

be the most effective way to present media-based content

about dreams. It is worth noting that given the limited scope

and parameters of this study, more research is needed in

order to better understand the present findings on a single

stream focused approach to learning.

One possible modification to the present study is an

enhanced single-stream focused approach with the use of

embedded triggered windows in a single window of

information that compliments the content. This modified

single-stream focused design reinforces Mayer’s (2001) theory

that spoken narration combined with an on-screen visual

guide does not split the attention of the learner, but in fact can

enhance the experience in certain instances. It may be

interesting to change both the frequency and nature of the

triggered pop-up study guides in future studies. Among the

study guide design changes could be the presentation of

visuals only, rather than text and visual combinations that

were used in this study, as well as increasing the frequency of

the guides by incorporating more triggers in future models.

An interesting and useful variation of this study could also

include the addition of an audio-only segment model, which

may indicate how much of the content is absorbed,

understood, and retained from simply listening to the spoken

word / audio. Another useful design change could be to

recreate the same model designs but with different content,

such as a history or science segment. Also the study

demographic pool is a variable that could easily be changed.

Conducting the same study with younger students, and/or

older participants, could show trends of how various aspects

of the three models perform with sample groups outside this

study's limited demographic pool.

Model C scored the lowest overall, and was also the most

complex. The design was based on the same video segment,

including a text window in sync with the spoken voice, and

provided interactive links to study guides as well as other

interactive components. This model’s apparent

ineffectiveness is likely due to an overload of the learner’s

cognitive processing abilities, presumably overwhelming the

learner’s visual processing channel. Model C’s reduced

scores for memory and comprehension may be caused by the

distraction of the participant’s focus due to the model’s

design. The idea that our mind’s processing channels can be

overloaded and lose much of their functionality is not new.

Much research has been done on cognitive load theory, based

on the assumption that the mind’s working memory has

limitations. Consequently, results as seen in Model C would

be typical (Mayer & Anderson, 1991) .

One conclusion drawn from this study is that a well-produced

video segment can be a powerful learning tool that provides

users with a rich and rewarding experience when incorporated

in the right multimedia design. As new technology influences

educational multimedia designs, what will remain important is

the ability to control the learner’s or end-user’s focus. When

watching a video, either on a television or computer, audience

reaction is directly linked to how people are engaged during

the event. A successful multimedia model using video as the

primary design component is one that creates an environment

that connects the content with the viewer on an emotional

level, includes related information woven into the experience

in a visual way, and is careful not to overload the viewer with

too much information.

References

Barry, A. M. S. (1997). Visual intelligence: Perception, image

and manipulation in visual communication. Albany: State

University of New York Press. Craig, S., Gholson, B., &

Driscoll, D. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in

multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent

properties, pictures features, and redundancy. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 94(2), 428-434. Dixon, N. (1981).

Preconscious processing. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Halloran, J. D. (1970). The effects of television. London:

Panther Books. Krugman, H. (1970). Electroencephalographic

aspects of low involvement: Implications for the McLuhan

hypothesis. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1991). Animations need

narrations: An experimental test of a dual coding hypothesis.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 484-490. Mayer, R.

E. (2001). Multi-media learning. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press Pavio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A

dual coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University

Press. Tabbers, H., Martens, R., & Merrienboer, J. (2004).

Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of

modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational

Psychology, 2004(74), 428-434.

Glossary

Multimedia : A content presentation form that augments

written text with the spoken word, other audio sources,

animation, pictures, and video, all of which utilizes different

levels of interactivity.

Metatrack: The track in a computer video stream that

incorporates triggered events.

Metadata: The computer software component that creates a

triggered event.

Embedded Triggers: The ability to have events placed into a

stream of video, such as the launching of a browser, opening

a website, opening a graphic, etc.

Linear: A traditional segment of video that has a set starting

point, plays back in real-time, and then ends.

Enhanced Linear: A traditional linear segment of video that

includes triggered events in the video steam.

Non-Linear: A model based on the ability of a user to choose

various media components, and hence create a unique

individual experience, which may take on aspects of a

traditional linear fashion, but incorporates user control

features so the experience will most likely not follow a clear

linear path.

Note: The Flash-based computer video model C used in this

study is available for free via the links page on his web site

[www.davidreiss.com]. The site also contains media samples

and other related work.

Appendix A: Survey

DREAMS Computer Video Study

Participant Name:

Age (circle one) - M / F

Major

(circle one) - Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior

Workstation: Date:

Model: (circle one) - A B C

SURVEY QUESTIONS:

Computer Experience & Knowledge: (circle one for each type)

Windows: none limited comfortable proficient

Apple/MAC: none limited comfortable proficient

Learning Style/Preferences:

• What type of information do you learn best from? (please

circle ALL that apply):

• Reading

• Writing

• Visual

• Lectures

• Class Discussions

• Hands-on workshops

• Traditional TV programs such as documentaries

• Computer-based video & audio

• Animations

• Static Visual & Graphic presentations like PowerPoint

Presentations

• Interactive Computer-based multi-media

• Other

Television Viewing for Entertainment per WEEK (circle one)

0-5hrs 5-10hrs 10-15hrs 15-20hrs Over 20 hrs

Television Viewing for Learning per WEEK (circle one)

0-5hrs 5-10hrs 10-15hrs 15-20hrs Over 20 hrs

Personal Experience with the study or practice of Dream

Interpretation (circle one)

none novice amateur professional

Appendix B: Written Test

PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS FROM

MEMORY

1. What part of our mind is working when we dream? (Circle

One)

a. Conscious b. Superconscious c. Unconscious d.

Subconscious

2. What is the basic ingredient of dreams? (Circle One)

a. Desires b. Day’s Events c. Past Events d. Imagination

3. How can dreams give you insight or helpful information?

(Circle all that apply)

• Looking at the characters in your dream and relating back to

your life.

• Looking at the theme of your dream and relating back to

your life.

• Asking a question before you go to sleep.

• Discussing what you want to dream about with a friend.

• 4. What is the language of the brain? (Circle One)

• a. Movies b. Words c. Symbols d. Sound

5. How is contrast used when discussing dreams? (Circle all

that apply)

• Compare similar things.

• Compare different things.

• Arrange things to show similarities.

• Arrange things to show differences.

6. How is the term “correlate” used when discussing dreams

in this video? (Circle one)

• To gather and compare unrelated things.

• To gather and compare related things.

• To gather and compare different things.

• To gather and compare similar things.

7. What does our mind try to do when dreaming? (Circle all

that apply)

• Escape our day’s events.

• Make sense of our day’s events.

• Attempt to predict the future.

• Relive past experiences.

• Re-experience that day’s events.

8. When you program your dreams what helpful things can

they do for you? (Circle all that apply)

• They can help you find a job.

• They can you learn new things.

• They can help solve a problem.

• They can help you answer questions you have in your life.

9. Identify some of the specific symbols presented in the video

portion only. (Circle all that apply)

• Grass

• Jewellery

• Clothing

• Tools

• Water

• Animal

• Camera

• Human Body

• Telephone

10. If you can’t remember the specifics of a dream, what else

can give you useful information? (Circle all that apply)

• Nothing

• Location

• Plot

• Theme

• Colours

© Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology

ISSN: 1499-6685